Time for a .32acp 1911 conversion?

First topic message reminder :

Nighthawk Custom is producing two 1911s in the new .30 Super Carry caliber, which means there are going to be commercially available .32acp/.32wc sized magazines available (*might* need a spacer). This will remove one obstacle for making .32acp/.32wc 1911 conversion kits. 

What do y'all think? Will Nelson or Marvel finally make one?

mpolans wrote:Nelson is able to sell their standard kit with scope rail for $525.  Assuming the Nighthawk mags are reasonably priced, I would think it'd be doable to make and sell a .32acp conversion kit for about $700, maybe less. I guess the big question is, how many folks would be willing to buy a .32acp kit if it cost about $700? Would it make a difference if it was easier to load accurate ammo for it than for a Pardini HP? (no custom expander or sizing dies, etc)

So you value a 32 1911 conversion only about a $200 premium to a 22 conversion? Ignoring magazines, all the small parts would have to be developed and tested, R&D is not cheap especially with specialized manufacturing needs (e.g. heat treat, finishing, ect). The sales volume would be significantly less too, meaning any specialized parts for a 32 conversion inherently would cost more. I seriously doubt a $200 margin over their standard product (which historically has had a waitlist) would justify production.

Don't forget that Pardini has a European market for their 32 that a 1911 conversion in 32acp could never touch. 

The best bet for 1911 in 32 happening is if a talented gunsmith was motivated to make it happen, realizing that it would require a significant amount of work and being ok with getting little return on the effort.

$200?

Are you guys kidding me?

32ACP match ammo cost $1/round even before C19. Even the bullets currently cost $0.25/pc.

A 32ACP conversion kit for a Pardini currently costs about $1,500. They have already done all of the development and have a proven product that is commercial.

$200

Folks are dreaming

No disrespect, but have you tried shooting your Benelli 32SWL at 50 yards in anything other than dead still medium temperature conditions?

The only Benelli I ever owned was (to my 17 year old eyes) a gorgeous metallic green Benelli 2C 250cc two stroke twin motorcycle (I had not then passed my test to get a full Motorcycle Driver's License, hence 250 limit in UK). Like most Italian vehicles of that era, it rusted away before my eyes .

In the past few years, in my retirement years actually, I have spent a small fortune exploring the 32 game and, am continuing to do so, with the help of a couple of equally crazy, but expert, conspirators!

In my very, very, recent experience, even quite decent factory Magtech 32SWL WC ammo often starts to tumble, even at 25 yards, in a Pardini HP32SWL.

The 32ACP match quality ammo has, IMHO, quite harsh recoil impulse. It can shoot amazing, equal to 22 AGG scores, but quite a challenge to develop really consistent reload ammo. It is possible. I struggled, but that is no yardstick.

IMHO. 32ACP has not been thoroughly developed and perfected. But it still has great potential.

32SWL WC ammo and guns are lovely, definitely an excellent low recoil, accurate, option for 25 yards CenterFire Bullseye competition. But perfecting gun/ammo is a challenge, but rather satisfying when it works. I am still working on 50 yards, with the help of fc60, and others.

Huge amount of invaluable info on this forum, but it takes a bit of work to search/find.

Ah, yes... Dr Don ....

You tapped me on the shoulder a couple years back ... at Shady Oaks ... the only other person shooting with one hand ..

I'm not doing any better, sorry to say. But if you happen to be a neurologist...

I have a 22 Short HS ... with a really sweet muzzle brake. Rapid fire pistol ... now obsolete.  Pretty sure the slide is aluminum. Even so, a 1911 slide is far more massive.

Somewhere in a distant memory, a gas operated 22 SA ... which would function for how many rds? And likely declining with each magazine its fed...

Not quite sure where WesG is leading, but I never had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Don or, indeed Wes G.

Coming back to THREEDFLYER's question regarding the SIG P240 multi caliber guns. First up, I have never owned one, although a SIG P210 9mm did get me most of my Service Pistol leg points, sadly it was a made in USA version, but a nice gun nonetheless. Bottom line is that the P240's are definitely high end target guns aimed primarily at the European 25m target shooting fraternity. No doubt accurate and reliable, but built in, at best, the 1990's (I might be wrong on dates). They are, IMHO, now essentially collector guns. Are any of the current generation serious ISSF International Center Fire shooters using a P240? My guess, absolutely none.

What has changed?

#1 Sights. The sights on an any modern Euro air pistol / 22 / 32 are immensely superior to the era of the P240 (or most iron sight 1911's for that matter). They make a huge difference, especially if you are older and/or have eyesight issues.

#2 Factory support. Right now the only practical option is Pardini. Look at what the serious Olympic & ISSF shooters are using.

#3 Dying business. If there was a lot of growth and market potential the Chinese/Koreans/Indians/someone would be marketing better/cheaper options to Pardini. AFAIK there are none.

Roy alluded to this in the ammo, but suitable projectiles can be a challenge. A few commercial options exist, but it is a very niche market, especially in the US. 

Low recoil is truly the only "advantage" to the 32, at least at this time. It is not any more accurate than other CF options, the firearms are significantly more specialized (often at higher cost).

Roy, sorry, I get names mixed up a lot. Faces too. Although I once recognized someone by his voice ... thought you were the Roy that shot at Sunnyvale with Bickar and his gang.

Love the comment about Italian vehicles.

WesG, yes I have shot at Sunnyvale on one occasion a couple of years ago. Nice range, very well run match. Yes, I am that guy with the foreign accent!

Soo, what about a light bullseye load for a .45 GAP using 160gr in a 1911…

james r chapman wrote:Soo, what about a light bullseye load for a .45 GAP using 160gr in a 1911…

…with a 13 twist barrel so they will stabilize at lower velocities?

I seem to recall an interesting discussion in this forum regarding some work by Jon Eulette using 160s in a 1:13 45 ACP barrel.  The smaller case capacity of the GAP should, in theory, add efficiency to the equation.

Or even a 10 twist barrel!

The problem with the really soft "powder puff" loads is to get a 1911 to cycle reliably, especially if there is a heavy red dot on the slide. I am currently struggling to solve that issue with my 10 twist gun.  I have not yet noticed any significant improvement with either the 10 twist or 13 twist guns, compared to the "normal" 16 twist, but it is early days in my evaluation and I have not been in good form recently anyway!

AFAIK, the aforementioned gunsmith found that the recoil impulse is actually softer with a 180 or 200 grain bullet and the accuracy is more likely to be consistent with the heavier bullet. I moved away from 160 bullets partly for that very reason.

I'm shooting Zero 200's with 2.8 BE with my 13 twist frame mount 1911.

I haven't shot the 200's at 50 yds. yet, but they are X ring at 25.

I let someone else on here shoot it and he just shook his head and handed it back to me.

That Zero 200 load sounds intriguing and I’m eager to learn how it does at 50.  Please do keep us posted once you have done more testing.  I am keenly interested because my upcoming off-season project is to fit a KKM 1:13 bbl to my frame mount wad gun.

DA/SA wrote:I'm shooting Zero 200's with 2.8 BE with my 13 twist frame mount 1911.

I haven't shot the 200's at 50 yds. yet, but they are X ring at 25.

I let someone else on here shoot it and he just shook his head and handed it back to me.

Is it smokey?

Not at all, that I have noticed. I don't shoot at indoor ranges though.

Must be the lube I'm using...good ole nra 50-50

The other thing I believe is that for slow stuff trigger control and grip/hold requirements are greatly magnified. That's why Air Pistol is an Olympic sport. Barrel time allows big flips.

What's nice about bullseye shooting is you're competing against similar equipment. True some folks have much better stuff but for the most part it's a game against yourself and your own abilities. There's the love of the game and then there's the love of the gun. Game lovers have two guns and two ammunitions. Gun lovers love to play with stuff, I'm one, frequently at my own detriment

RoyDean wrote:Or even a 10 twist barrel!

The problem with the really soft "powder puff" loads is to get a 1911 to cycle reliably, especially if there is a heavy red dot on the slide. I am currently struggling to solve that issue with my 10 twist gun.  I have not yet noticed any significant improvement with either the 10 twist or 13 twist guns, compared to the "normal" 16 twist, but it is early days in my evaluation and I have not been in good form recently anyway!

AFAIK, the aforementioned gunsmith found that the recoil impulse is actually softer with a 180 or 200 grain bullet and the accuracy is more likely to be consistent with the heavier bullet. I moved away from 160 bullets partly for that very reason.

A slide mount 1911 is defeating the purpose of using a 10 or 13 twist barrel. A slide mount pistol is going to require a certain velocity in order to function properly regardless of twist rate. Especially when utilizing a 9000SC.

As you already know, the object of the faster twist barrels it to stabilize the projectile at low velocities. That's where frame mounted optics really start to shine!

I'll add that I find myself shooting the slide mount 1911 more often lately, due to the sight picture. I've seen you mention that the emitter distracted you considerably when using certain scopes. I always thought that was a bit weird until I started shooting my frame mount. The difference is that with the slide mount, everything is pretty symmetrical as far as the sight picture. With my frame mount, the scope is a single sided mount, so I haven't gotten used to the asymmetrical sight picture of the mounting plate on the left side of the pistol even though the scope is perfectly centered over the barrel and actually 1/4" lower than the slide mounted scope. It's very distracting!! I just need to shoot it more...

"A slide mount 1911 is defeating the purpose of using a 10 or 13 twist barrel"

Yes, DA/SA, I think you may be right. I intend to test the 10 twist gun again later with just iron sights. I don't like frame mounts (tried them on several guns in the past), and my current preference for slide mounted Aimpoint 9000sc 4moa is unlikely to change.

Live and learn!

I didn't finish my thought...if someone comes up with a real ringer of a pistol, then new equipment becomes a must have and that doesn't help our sport to grow. A friend mentioned that in his benchrest days, the emergence of the 6PPC made everyone else's equipment obsolete.l understand it in Formula I or America's Cup racing but that's not us. Thanks

Bruce, I don't think your fears are warranted. The Military Marksmanship Armorers (and many others) have been incrementally improving 1911's forever, but it is clear that, certainly at National level, it is the guy behind the gun that is the decisive factor.

I try almost every innovation that comes along, but, mostly because of age and lifestyle habits, my scores are declining. Yes, even if fit and talented, you need decent equipment in order to compete, but a well tuned 22 conversion and an accurised SARO are still very, very hard to beat and can easily shoot High Master scores in the right hands.

This thread began as a question about 32ACP. As I stated earlier, I think that there is still room for development in that caliber, but if perfected will it change the game? No, I very much doubt it.

A decent 22 and a basic accurised SARO got me to Master very quickly. I still shoot that SARO quite often in matches. If I had been smart enough to just concentrate on those two guns I might have made it to HM, and I would have saved a huge amount of time and tens of thousands of dollars!

Ho hum.